All posts in the topic Bags of rubbish (Short link)
Summary
- There are 33 posts — by 17 authors — in this topic.
- Latest post made by Rachael Farnsworth at 2009 Jul 29 12:17 UTC
| From | File | Date |
|---|---|---|
| Stephanie Jenkins | bin_rubbish_leaflet.jpg | 2009 Jul 27 07:02 UTC |
We have just had a leaflet from the City Council entitled âBin all your
rubbishâ, saying âFrom 3 August 2009, Oxford City Council will no longer
collect excess rubbish place by the side or on top of your green wheelie
bin.â
I thought that this was supposed to be the case anyway, but this is formal
notification under Section 46(1) of the Environmental Protection Act (1990)
that anyone leaving a bag of rubbish beside their wheelie bin (or a total of
more than four lilac sacks) will now be subject to a fixed penalty notice of
£80.
What provision is going to be made for student houses, where they dump all
their excess rubbish to be collected in the front garden rather than on the
pavement? Unless and until these sacks becomes a hazard, people canât be
fined for leaving bags on their own property can they? But if the city council
doesnât pick these sacks up, what a terrible sight Headington will be.
And at the end of the year students quite understandably all have a lot to
throw away, and a single wheelie bin will never be big enough for up to five
individuals having a clear-out at the same time. Is the city council really
going to leave all the waste lying outside student houses over the summer while
they try in vain to fine the vanished tenants?
Stephanie, you missed the bit about the wheelie bin lid must be closed.
quote
All non-recyclable rubbish must be contained in your green wheelie bin with the
lid closed
endquote
That last bag in the bin can prop the lid open a bit!
Also, bins and boxes must be left at the boundary of your property by 7am and
not before 6pm the previous day.
And here's the laugh
After collection the wheelie bin will be returned to the same position.
To start with, one the operatives goes round pulling the wheelie bins into the
road and after emptying they are left on the pavement not necessarily outside
one's home.
As for a missed collection, our wheelie bin was missed once and when I rang
about it the man didn't even ask for my address, I did tell him, but nothing
happened.
http://www.thelabourparty.org/bin_fine_cumbria.htm http://www.prisoners-of-war.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=3199&PID=29175 http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-561037/Father-taken-court-fined--- overfilled-wheelie-bin-just-inches.html How VERY Labour!
[Oops again - here was me getting paranoid with David's post about
censorship until I realized I had only clicked "reply" to Nigel rather
than "reply all"]
Time to open up waste collection to proper competition I'd say.
These people are your servants not your masters. You are their
customers. You pay them. They take these excuses, such as land fill
regulations or health and safety assessments, and turn them into rules
that have the effect of new laws that can be enforceable with
punishment fines and make your life inconvenient.
It seems to me there is plenty of room for a premium service for
example; one that will actually come onto your property, round to your
kitchen door if necessary, to get your bin, wash it out when they've
emptied it and put it back neatly; one that will give you a scale of
charges so you know you will be billed by weight or volume (and not
"fined" which by definition is a punishment) but will take whatever
you leave for them; one that promises not to go through your rubbish
bins in the dead of night categorizing you, not your rubbish, by some
new socio-economic measure and treat you differently as a result; ones
that come on different days and you can open accounts with more than
one of them so that if you have something particular you want rid of
one day that isn't your main collection they will take it anyway and
bill you a little; one which will pay you for any recyclable waste for
which they get money upstream - indeed I know of one firm dealing in a
plastic bottle crusher who does just that - sends you bags that you
can send back full of crushed PET bottles and get money back off them,
eventually paying back the cost of the crusher and then some.
All over the country council bureaucrats are being metamorphosized
into "refuse tzars" (nice pun - for of course what they do is "refuse"
to take your refuse except under ever stricter rules); and some day
these pavlovian conditioned customers are going to bite back. You
wait; after the "fines" will come the "SWAT" teams to haul you out and
embarrass you in front of your neighbours - because monopolies,
especially ones with statutory force, can do that sort of thing.
"Public servants" - pah!
Ah well, we can but hope. Why *do* all of you who have to work to
their rules just roll over and accept this escalation of hostilities,
this change of role from servant to policeman? You just watch what
happens when you don't pay these "fines" on the grounds that they are
no longer giving the service your tax pays for!
Maybe, in future, someone will quip:
"First, they came for the extra bin bags, but I said nothing, because
I didn't have extra bin bags"
Oh - by the way - be careful what you flush down the loo too - I was
reading this week of some research in Oregon where they were testing
equipment intended to check for drugs use by sampling sewer water. By
the time they've got us all on their DNA database, they'll be able to
match that with individuals and potentially use it for evidence (but
don't assume it will stop at drugs - if there's too much sugar shown
the diabetes SWAT team will land in your back garden and steal all
your cakes no doubt).
> You just watch what happens when you don't pay these "fines" on the grounds that they are no longer giving the service your tax pays for I think my position in the circumstances of the "bin overfilled by 4 cm" case would be that "some person or persons unknown have deposited rubbish in your bin". *I* don't own it, I'm only the designated keeper. Since anything personally identifiable these days would be paper anyway (and in a separate box) - how is one going to prove beyond reasonable doubt my guilt? What next - "bin locks" ? It seems quite bizarre to me that we're moving, as you say, from service provision to an entirely more confrontational relationship between council and citizen [1]. And, like many other areas, I think that the basic problem is that the citizens simply *don't agree* with the solutions. This only really makes sense in the wider context of what's coming - the charging of refuse collection by weight. This is something that the council has "no plans" to do, by which they mean that they have every plan to do, which asking the ludicrously biassed "consultative" (ack, spit) question of "do you think it would be a good idea to give a discount to those households that throw away less rubbish?" gives the lie to. It's ludicrous because we all know taxes never go down, only up - nobody would get a discount, only some would pay the same, everyone else would be paying more. So - steps to achieve this goal that they have "no plans" to do, aka Slowly Boiling the Frog : 1) Make everyone use uniformly sized bins that can be integrated with a standardized weighscale on the truck. - check 2) Make sure those bins have RFID tags[1] in them, so you can tell, automatically, whose waste it is, and who to bill. - check 3) "Prime the way" by performing facetious "consultation" questions based on a false premise - check. 4) Ensure that everyone is using the standard issue units, and forbid the use of anything else. This is a key step, so issue large fines to force this through. <-- *You are here*. 5) Activate the infrastructure, calculate how much extra revenue you could soak up, commence billing. Seems to me that we're quite far along a path for something there were no plans to do. The flip side of the coin is of course all the *bad* side-effects that effectively discouraging people from using the efficient infrastructure for waste removal that we have generated: 1) I'm going to put more food waste through an insinkerator and through the sewerage system. Thames water won't be too happy, but heck, this isn't Bethselamin.. 2) I'm going to burn anything I can 3) I'm going to make more use of the tip (I've seen people using this option right now because of fortnightly collections, being unwilling to have rotting food waste in their terraced houses). From those willing to go further, I'd expect to see 1) A lot of "would you mind terribly if we just popped this in your bin" awkwardness 2) An increase in dumping of waste in other people's bins (see above) 3) A massive increase in fly-tipping (which is a problem now, *even though all you have to do is drive to the tip*!) - gee - that's sensible - prevent people from using a working refuse collection system, and simultaneously have to deal with the consequences All totally insane. But then. There are no plans, are there? [1] I feel like I'm living in the Simpsons episode... Springfield will have its first annual "Do What You Feel" Festival this Saturday, whenever you feel like showing up! It'll be a welcome change from our annual, "Do As We Say" Festival started by German settlers in 1946. [2] When I learned this, my thoughts immediately turned to http://is.gd/1LX6b . "The RFID-Zapper might cause you to feel armed against companies or governments trying to compromise your privacy. You might even experience euphoria, especially when destroying RFID-Tags. This could lead to dangerous behavior, like speaking your mind, using freedom of speech, fighting for your rights, all of which are bound to ultimately lead to the communist world revolution ;-)" On Sat, Jul 25, 2009 at 11:59 AM, Jock Coats <email obscured>> wrote: > > Time to open up waste collection to proper competition I'd say. > > These people are your servants not your masters. You are their customers. You pay them. They take these excuses, such as land fill regulations or health and safety assessments, and turn them into rules that have the effect of new laws that can be enforceable with punishment fines and make your life inconvenient. > > It seems to me there is plenty of room for a premium service for example; one that will actually come onto your property, round to your kitchen door if necessary, to get your bin, wash it out when they've emptied it and put it back neatly; one that will give you a scale of charges so you know you will be billed by weight or volume (and not "fined" which by definition is a punishment) but will take whatever you leave for them; one that promises not to go through your rubbish bins in the dead of night categorizing you, not your rubbish, by some new socio-economic measure and treat you differently as a result; ones that come on different days and you can open accounts with more than one of them so that if you have something particular you want rid of one day that isn't your main collection they will take it anyway and bill you a little; one which will pay you for any recyclable waste for which they get money upstream - indeed I know of one firm dealing in a plastic bottle crusher who does just that - sends you bags that you can send back full of crushed PET bottles and get money back off them, eventually paying back the cost of the crusher and then some. > > All over the country council bureaucrats are being metamorphosized into "refuse tzars" (nice pun - for of course what they do is "refuse" to take your refuse except under ever stricter rules); and some day these pavlovian conditioned customers are going to bite back. You wait; after the "fines" will come the "SWAT" teams to haul you out and embarrass you in front of your neighbours - because monopolies, especially ones with statutory force, can do that sort of thing. "Public servants" - pah! > > Ah well, we can but hope. Why *do* all of you who have to work to their rules just roll over and accept this escalation of hostilities, this change of role from servant to policeman? You just watch what happens when you don't pay these "fines" on the grounds that they are no longer giving the service your tax pays for! > > Maybe, in future, someone will quip: > > "First, they came for the extra bin bags, but I said nothing, because I didn't have extra bin bags" > > Oh - by the way - be careful what you flush down the loo too - I was reading this week of some research in Oregon where they were testing equipment intended to check for drugs use by sampling sewer water. By the time they've got us all on their DNA database, they'll be able to match that with individuals and potentially use it for evidence (but don't assume it will stop at drugs - if there's too much sugar shown the diabetes SWAT team will land in your back garden and steal all your cakes no doubt).
I'm still waiting for a replacement wheelie bin (mine was stolen, with rubbish still inside, some weeks ago). When the leaflet came I called the relevant department at the council to ask what would happen to my rubbish bag since I have as yet no sight of the promised replacement bin. It was explained that the bins were made abroad (er - why is that then, and what's happening to all the plastic in the recycling boxes? Is it sent abroad - carbon footprint notwithstanding - for recycling into wheelie bins which are then reimported into this country?) and that there is a dearth of 140 litre bins: I'd have to have a 180 litre one. When I explained that I generate two to three carrier bags' worth of non-recyclable rubbish every fortnight which would barely cover the floor of a 180 litre bin I was told that once the smaller ones were finally sourced I could have it swapped for one of those. In the meantime it's carefully explained exactly when and where the wheelie bin should be put out. The time restrictions are ridiculous. What if you're going away? Are you supposed to leave your trash to ferment while you're on holiday? Also, when I first arrived in Barton the binmen (or whatever socially correct term I should refer to them by) would happily come down the alley behind our terrace, pick up the big, heavy metal dustbins, and take them to the kerb. Now that the bins have wheels, making them soooooooo much easier to move, we are no longer allowed to hide them prettily at the back, but are supposed to have them, disgustingly, by our front doors. Why are these regulations being forced on us? It smacks of control-freakery beyond endurance. Jock points out that 'these people are your servants not your masters' but there's no evidence of that. Every 'consultation' - such as residents' permit charges - is a sham in which no notice is taken of the people's voice. For instance, when turning left off the bypass into Cutteslowe was made illegal, every household in the area was given a vote on whether to keep it so or return it to a legal turnoff, but with the proviso that if they didn't vote, it would be counted as a vote to keep the turn illegal. Hello? Excuse me? Since when did an abstention turn into a yes-vote? Is that local (or any) democracy? Once they begin weighing our bins, I want a bloody great refund for hardly having any non-recyclable trash, please. A huge one. In cash, in an envelope, thanks. As for sampling sewer water, in this observation-obsessed age I wouldn't be surprised if they weren't doing it already. I'm waiting for the cameras to be sneaked inside my house so they can make sure I behave properly, don't lick the plate or pick my nose, eat up my greens and the other four of my five-a-day, and go to bed on time, soberly and decorously, having first washed behind my ears. Cynical? Oh, I think so! PG ----- Original Message ----- From: Jock Coats To: Headington & Marston Neighbourhood Forum Sent: Saturday, July 25, 2009 12:44 PM Subject: Re: [Oxford-HM] Bags of rubbish [Oops again - here was me getting paranoid with David's post about censorship until I realized I had only clicked "reply" to Nigel rather than "reply all"] Time to open up waste collection to proper competition I'd say. These people are your servants not your masters. You are their customers. You pay them. They take these excuses, such as land fill regulations or health and safety assessments, and turn them into rules that have the effect of new laws that can be enforceable with punishment fines and make your life inconvenient. It seems to me there is plenty of room for a premium service for example; one that will actually come onto your property, round to your kitchen door if necessary, to get your bin, wash it out when they've emptied it and put it back neatly; one that will give you a scale of charges so you know you will be billed by weight or volume (and not "fined" which by definition is a punishment) but will take whatever you leave for them; one that promises not to go through your rubbish bins in the dead of night categorizing you, not your rubbish, by some new socio-economic measure and treat you differently as a result; ones that come on different days and you can open accounts with more than one of them so that if you have something particular you want rid of one day that isn't your main collection they will take it anyway and bill you a little; one which will pay you for any recyclable waste for which they get money upstream - indeed I know of one firm dealing in a plastic bottle crusher who does just that - sends you bags that you can send back full of crushed PET bottles and get money back off them, eventually paying back the cost of the crusher and then some. All over the country council bureaucrats are being metamorphosized into "refuse tzars" (nice pun - for of course what they do is "refuse" to take your refuse except under ever stricter rules); and some day these pavlovian conditioned customers are going to bite back. You wait; after the "fines" will come the "SWAT" teams to haul you out and embarrass you in front of your neighbours - because monopolies, especially ones with statutory force, can do that sort of thing. "Public servants" - pah! Ah well, we can but hope. Why *do* all of you who have to work to their rules just roll over and accept this escalation of hostilities, this change of role from servant to policeman? You just watch what happens when you don't pay these "fines" on the grounds that they are no longer giving the service your tax pays for! Maybe, in future, someone will quip: "First, they came for the extra bin bags, but I said nothing, because I didn't have extra bin bags" Oh - by the way - be careful what you flush down the loo too - I was reading this week of some research in Oregon where they were testing equipment intended to check for drugs use by sampling sewer water. By the time they've got us all on their DNA database, they'll be able to match that with individuals and potentially use it for evidence (but don't assume it will stop at drugs - if there's too much sugar shown the diabetes SWAT team will land in your back garden and steal all your cakes no doubt). Jock On 25 Jul 2009, at 09:19, Nigel Magnay wrote: > They'll discover the easy solution. > Simply leave your excess rubbish next to *someone else's* bins. > > > > On Sat, Jul 25, 2009 at 8:21 AM, <email obscured>> wrote: > >> We have just had a leaflet from the City Council entitled “Bin all >> your >> rubbish, saying “From 3 August 2009, Oxford City Council will no >> longer >> collect excess rubbish place by the side or on top of your green >> wheelie >> bin.> >> I thought that this was supposed to be the case anyway, but this is >> formal >> notification under Section 46(1) of the Environmental Protection >> Act (1990) >> that anyone leaving a bag of rubbish beside their wheelie bin (or a >> total of >> more than four lilac sacks) will now be subject to a fixed penalty >> notice of >> £80. >> >> What provision is going to be made for student houses, where they >> dump all >> their excess rubbish to be collected in the front garden rather >> than on the >> pavement? Unless and until these sacks becomes a hazard, people >> can’t be >> fined for leaving bags on their own property can they? But if the >> city >> council doesn’t pick these sacks up, what a terrible sight >> Headington will >> be. >> >> And at the end of the year students quite understandably all have a >> lot to >> throw away, and a single wheelie bin will never be big enough for >> up to five >> individuals having a clear-out at the same time. Is the city >> council really >> going to leave all the waste lying outside student houses over the >> summer >> while they try in vain to fine the vanished tenants? >> >> Stephanie Jenkins -- Jock Coats - OX3 Online, the community portal for OX3 Warden's Flat 1e, J Block Morrell Hall, OXFORD, OX3 0FF m: 07769 695767 skype:jock.coats?call <email obscured> http://jockcoats.me Jock Coats Headington/Marston - Headington Hill, Oxford Info about Jock Coats: http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/jockcoats View all messages on this topic at: http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/5B08vYiVKpfpRoaGXMraY ----------------------------------------- To post, e-mail: <email obscured> Use "Reply-to-All" via e-mail to post publicly. To leave or for daily digest, type "unsubscribe" or "digest on" in subject, then send to: <email obscured> More information about Oxford - Headington & Marston Neighbourhood Forum: http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/oxford-hm E-Democracy.Org rules: http://e-democracy.org/rules ----------------------------------------- Technical assistance thanks to our friends at http://OnlineGroups.Net
I haven't seen this wonderful leaflet yet - but reading the above comments does
this mean I'll be fined if someone leaves a sack by my bin? How far from my bin
does the sack have to be in order that I avoid the fine??
Forgive my levity - but I agree surely this just means more fly tipping...
On 25 Jul 2009, at 15:04, Pippa Gwilliam wrote:
> Jock points out that 'these people are your servants not your
> masters' but there's no evidence of that. Every 'consultation' -
> such as residents' permit charges - is a sham in which no notice is
> taken of the people's voice. For instance, when turning left off
> the bypass into Cutteslowe was made illegal, every household in the
> area was given a vote on whether to keep it so or return it to a
> legal turnoff, but with the proviso that if they didn't vote, it
> would be counted as a vote to keep the turn illegal. Hello?
> Excuse me? Since when did an abstention turn into a yes-vote? Is
> that local (or any) democracy?
Personally I hope we are entering the beginning of the end for this
"democratic" system that is no better than two wolves and a sheep
voting on what's for dinner. Forget for a moment the anomaly that no
member of the county's "ruling" party represents the city, though that
is bad in itself. Participation, in the minimal form of voting, seems
to be interpreted as consent to whatever form the social contract may
take after the elections regardless of whether one voted in favour of
it or not, which again is bad enough.
But we have reached the point where regularly a minority of potential
voters even bother to participate even to that extent, so not only do
we have the repugnant situation where a minority of those who do vote,
because of our first past the post system, actually favour the
"winning" outcome, but that that even represents a minority of the
minority that do vote.
The trouble is the system itself feels that this grants it a mandate,
by discounting the non-views of the majority that don't vote. It
assumes that by not voting those people are tacitly consenting also to
whatever outcome the minority that do vote decide upon - the old "if
they wanted to complain they'd vote" canard. This is an assumption
too far in my opinion. But what to do about it? How to indicate you
do not consent whilst not actually participating and thereby
indicating your consent? It seems to me from questioning people on
the doorstep that most of those who say they are unlikely to vote do
so because they feel that "you are all the same", "it doesn't matter
who wins you'll do it anyway" (whatever "it" is) or variations on that
theme.
In the absence of real reform, the only thing I can think of is to
campaign for all those who do not regularly vote to consider using
their vote but spoiling their ballot paper. Whilst spoilt papers
measure in the tens usually at most at a ward level, imagine the
embarrassment of winning if you knew that there were more spoilt
papers than the winner, or even than all the other votes cast for any
of the candidates? The headlines one could make out of "spoilt papers
beat winning candidate".
Something has to give this self-perpetuating minority controlled
"democracy" a right metaphorical kicking somehow to highlight just how
unrepresentative it is; how it goes around imposing new systems,
backed by fines, courts and eventually imprisonment, on the basis of a
mandate from a minority of a minority.
Merely voting for another party using the same system is not really
any better. By themselves participating in that system each party is
complicit in it - they are saying "if we win, regardless of whether we
get a minority of a minority backing us, we will control this system
for the time being" - they may offer a little less interference or a
little more interference, a little more honest consultation or a
little less honest consultation, a little more taken from your pocket
for their schemes or a little less taken from your pocket for their
schemes, but all are playing under the same set of rules that means
that far more people do not agree with the end result than expressly
do vote for the end result.
We need new institutions, built from the people as individual upwards,
not imposed by the political classes downwards. The primary level of
governance is the individual, or the individual household. The next
is co-operation amongst those we share certain needs with - our
street, or our children's school (and these need not be the same
governing institutions either), and only when there is something these
very local levels of governance cannot achieve efficiently should they
be allowed to collaborate with other neighbourhoods to deliver some
bigger co-ordinated project. Mind you, that also means that we must
have the courage to stop going to the highest level possible and
demanding that "something must be done". For everything that "must be
done" we should start exploring whether it can be done by ourselves,
or co-operatively with our neighbours, instead of relying on this
system to do it for us.
I was torn off a while back by a local councillor for using the Forum for party
political points. I have apologised to Stephanie and others for that, but the
latest round of correspondence seem to be taking specific policy positions that
seem to have a definite Party flavour. Either we do or we don't accept the
rules of the Forum. I stood back so I do not see why others should be allowed
to proceed.
Roy Darke
This thread does seem to have become rather political. As changing the new
city council policy (let alone the whole political system) is not an option,
maybe we can go back to discussing the immediate problems that it is going to
bring to an area with a large number of students.
What happens if students move into a house which has no recycling boxes? And
how are they supposed to know what goes in which box? (It is not obvious: I
would expect a large green wheelie bin with "Recycle for Oxford" plastered on
the side to be a recycling bin, for instance.)
If the city council refuses to collect rubbish placed beside the bins, how are
students who do not have cars supposed to deal with it as it starts to build up
and fester?
On 26 Jul 2009, at 21:18, <email obscured> wrote:
> This thread does seem to have become rather political.
Though despite protestations to the contrary, not "party" political.
My post was more a "plague on all your houses" (and explicitly said so
at one point - how else is one supposed to read "Merely voting for
another party using the same system is not really any better. By
themselves participating in that system each party is complicit in
it"?).
Nonetheless on your substantive point...
> What happens if students move into a house which has no recycling
> boxes? And how are they supposed to know what goes in which box?
> (It is not obvious: I would expect a large green wheelie bin with
> "Recycle for Oxford" plastered on the side to be a recycling bin,
> for instance.)
Perhaps the city needs to get in touch with landlords and agents -
especially any who are registered under the multi-occupancy
registration scheme - and put the onus on them to ensure that when a
tenancy commences they have the complete set.
As regards Brookes students, the majority of them will have spent
their first year in halls of residence. The recycling regime in place
in halls of residence (which I think is also replicated in Oxford
University hall type accommodation) is designed to introduce them to
the city's normal system for when they are living out. We do not have
blue boxes, but do have blue bags. The main difference is that they
can only put glass into the green boxes (because they are not sorted
at the kerbside but deposited centrally in large glass bins that the
council empties once a week) and plastic *and* paper into the blue bags.
I think it will be more difficult if and when food waste is collected
separately across the city - there is a limit to the number of
receptacles we can reasonably get into the students' kitchens - but
they will at least have been introduced to the basics of the system
and should not really have an excuse for not at least replicating what
they have had a year to get used to.
Indeed, the Brookes system is somewhat more onerous than the general
city-wide system - our students have to take their blue bags to a
central comingled recycling compound and their green boxes to a
collection point for each block. Only their residual waste is
collected by hall staff from their flats.
> If the city council refuses to collect rubbish placed beside the
> bins, how are students who do not have cars supposed to deal with it
> as it starts to build up and fester?
I agree, though it is worth also saying that nearly a third of
households on average across the country do not have access to a car;
and they are predominantly the less well off and the elderly. Whilst
it might be assumed that these groups are less likely also to overflow
their bins, if they do they are the ones who are going to be
disproportionately affected by a draconian punishment regime.
Certainly if there really is no plan to weigh and charge, then a
rethink on this fines policy is required - at least allowing
discretion (and ensuring a personal visit and chat before punishment)
and not simply slapping some penalty charge notice that could be more
than a week's earnings for some and cause real distress.
I REALLY don't like Jock's post about how "they are our servants". Actually:
NO, they're human beings, doing a job, for not great pay. Say thank you to
them - do you want to do it?
I think he mistakes policy for implementation. The bin men (the aforementioned
"servants") are merely implementing the policies set by the managers which have
been agreed by council. Jock was on the council not so long ago, and given his
posts, I suspect he'd like to be again some day. So don't shoot the
messengers, shoot those who set the policies. He should know this!
I'd like to make a couple of points: Before the council introduced the
current collection service, there were months and months and months of panic
and worry. When it actually came in, for most households, it wasn't THAT much
of a big deal. It was actually pretty easy to understand what went in which
box, and there were various helpful reminders about what to put out and when (I
still get text reminders, but I don't actually need one now: I know from which
box is fullest which week it is). Yes, it's a bit of a pain, and a bid
unsightly and inconvenient. But I (and I think most people) understand why we
need to recycle, and it isn't that much of a problem. I'd prefer not to have
the boxes and bins clogging things up in the house and garden, but I'm
generally pleased to offset my carbon footprint, and, thinking back, the black
bags (so often split) were horrid, so for me it's worth it. There are minor
inconveniences: the bins often aren't put back properly. But that's no more
than a bore. I think it depends on your crew. In Marston, we generally have
a great crew, who sort though, and take all the recycleables and who are
sensible. There are crews who are jobsworths. But, mostly, it's a good
service, which mostly works.
For most people, I'd guess it's the same.
It's much harder for those with no front garden, but there aren't that many of
those in Oxford, or on this forum. Students are lazy, but I think they're the
last generation. My 7 year old knows she has to recycle. It'll filter
through.
Landfill tax (the tax that has to be paid for rubbish that can not be recycled)
is not a joke. If we landfill too much, there will be fines. This is a
governmental thing. These fines will have to be paid by taxpayers. This
means YOUR council taX. The council is RIGHT to try and stop us paying these
taxes.
Going back to "recycling is a good thing"...
If you read your leaflet, you'll see that it talks about "persistent"
offenders. This means if you go on holiday, or have a birthday, or some other
one-0ff event that means you have an over-stuffed bin, you probably won't be
fined.
The council picks up our waste. Jock talked about the joy of outsourcing. How
I hate it! To stand ANY chance of keeping control, k e e p i t i n -
h o u s e. Once you've outsourced it, you lose all and any control. the
right thing is to keep it in-house and make it right. There are VERY few
things that deliver a service (no matter how much you criticise it, it's still
a service that delivers to EVERY residence in the city every single week. how
many other services can boast that!). If the service isn't right, then make it
so. You (the council) own it. Once you give it away, you don't, and you're
at their mercy. Look at the railways. Outsourcing is NOT THE answer.
If you don't want to participate, you don't have to (we all pay towards all the
services, and I don't use most of them. But I support the fact the council
gives out benefits, etc). If you don't want to participate, go to Redbridge.
Probably, people aren't reading now, but my key thing about this post is that
the leaflet said "persistent" offenders. Basically, MOST people recycle.
But there are pockets within the city that put out loads of side waste each
week, and their blue and green boxes are empty. THOSE are the people the
council wants to go after. Not the good resident who's gone on holiday, or
had a party and had lots of extra waste because of a one-off event.
There WILL be fines for the council if we don't recycle.
So if the new policy makes people who currently don't recycle, recycle more,
then it's a good thing. Isn't it?
If you don't like it, dispose of your waste yourself. If you want to use the
council services, then use them. It's not much of a big deal. Not for any of
us.
But, please, don't think of them as your servants. You aren't that important.
Going on holiday now.
Kate
ex-city works policy officer.
Now, not working for the council.
Re Kate Stratford's comment:
Most "operatives" are generally polite, efficient, satisfactory, and happy to
be of service. They earn their wages well. Bin men (rarely much VISIBLE female
employment in this job, inexplicably) are under high pressure to work too fast
to be able to be meticulous (eg bin repositioning and cleaning up loose
detritus). More need hiring.
Management in enough people's experience has appeared less satisfactory. The
managers are IMO too many in number and oversalaried, overpensioned. Reduce the
surplus.
Public service is the ideal that is too often poorly delivered (despite spin
and propaganda suggesting otherwise) to hard-pressed service users and
taxpayers. We rightly resent being treated with arrogant contempt, eg when we
encounter undue obstructionism, disregard or patronage by bosses who may not be
fit for purpose.
Halve silly salaries for senior managers, and we'd get staff to fill posts
still, and just as "good"!
Well said Kate; the Landfill Tax is not a joke. We can't go on landfilling with
gay abandon, or we will run out of space in which to do so. A trip up the M40
to Ardley will confirm this.
I personally prefer a wheelie-bin outside my [terraced, pavement-less] house
then to have to stack up disgusting bin-bags in my back yard for a week and
then carry them dripping through my house.
Regards
Noam Bleicher
078 1847 1655
056 0268 4870
I am not so worried about the fines (although I think they are unworkable) if
that is what it takes to get people to recycle.
I am worried about the categorical statement: "From 3 August 2009, Oxford City
Council will no longer collect excess rubbish placed by the side or on top of
your green wheelie bin" (see scan of front of leaflet, uploaded herewith).
The following file was added to this topic:
> Well said Kate; the Landfill Tax is not a joke. We can't go on landfilling
with gay abandon, or we will run out of space in which to do so. A trip up the
M40 to Ardley will confirm this.
No. We are in *no way* running out of space in which to landfill; yes,
we would need to commission new sites; yes there's good reasons to
find alternatives (lechate, for one), but the "running out of space"
argument is simply dishonest.
Also, consider - economics tells you this to be so. If supply of
landfill space was at such a premium, there wouldn't be any need to
have a "landfill tax", because the precious space would be priced
accordingly, and thus provide the economic incentive to find some
other solution.
>
> I personally prefer a wheelie-bin outside my [terraced, pavement-less] house
then to have to stack up disgusting bin-bags in my back yard for a week and
then carry them dripping through my house.
>
By pavement-less do you mean your front door opens directly onto the
road? If so aren't you a bit stuffed, given leaving your bin there
outside of the "designated hours" will be punished by the Bin Polizei
?
On 26 Jul 2009, at 23:33, <email obscured> wrote:
> I REALLY don't like Jock's post about how "they are our servants".
> Actually: NO, they're human beings, doing a job, for not great
> pay. Say thank you to them - do you want to do it?
I apologize but I really do think you have misinterpreted or I have
badly phrased. The council, all forms of governance, are our servants
not our masters. Operatives are workers, doing what is set for them,
even those who immediately set their rules for them are operating to
parameters required of them from on high - whether it be the land fill
tax directives or whatever - ultimately they are set by people *we*
elect as *our* representatives, to *serve* us. There can be no other
justification for collective government in my opinion - that it
*serves* not *rules*.
Yet all too often they operate far more by coercion than consent.
Hence the creation of ever more regulation which is enforced by
punishment rather than by contract, or, as in the case of Kent where
they have been rummaging through bins and using the data to "profile"
people (just to stay with the bins issue - there are many others of
course), by imposition and invasion of privacy - other organization
types would not get away with this treatment of the very people they
are established to serve.
> I think he mistakes policy for implementation.
I don't think I do - it is "policy" to go about the "implementation"
by coercion rather than incentive, say. To rely on punishment. Just
where is the "carrot" in all this (apart from in the pilot food-waste
project of course).
> The bin men (the aforementioned "servants") are merely implementing
> the policies set by the managers which have been agreed by council.
> Jock was on the council not so long ago, and given his posts, I
> suspect he'd like to be again some day.
I very much doubt it. I have become a fairly convinced left-
libertarian, a mutualist. I think the entire system sucks, from
Europe, down through Westminster, to County, City and company.
Precisely because it no longer *serves* but seeks to *rule*.
> So don't shoot the messengers, shoot those who set the policies.
> He should know this!
Indeed, though that does not only mean the political classes, albeit
that that is the primary target. There are senior levels of executive
staff who promote and formulate these "good ideas" and how to
implement them and who are therefore complicit in creating and
perpetuating the mechanisms of coercion - our politicians are not
clever enough to do that on their own!
> If you read your leaflet, you'll see that it talks about
> "persistent" offenders. This means if you go on holiday, or have a
> birthday, or some other one-0ff event that means you have an over-
> stuffed bin, you probably won't be fined.
That "probably" is part of the problem though - it means that such
punishments *could* be imposed, and it could be done quite
arbitrarily. That is part of what makes a one-sided contract (one
that one of the parties to which cannot refuse to accept, like this
"social contract" we're all supposed to adhere to) so dangerous.
> The council picks up our waste. Jock talked about the joy of
> outsourcing. How I hate it!
Actually I didn't. I talked about competition. Which is precisely
not how the railways were handled, or PFI projects, or much else in
the corporatization of government that has happened in the past thirty
years. As you rightly point out these are often even worse than
direct provision - privatizing the profits, usually to big
corporations who are able to navigate the barriers that government
puts up in the name of "best value" and so on, and socializing the
problems. They all have monopolistic cash cows and no incentive for
efficiency or innovation.
> To stand ANY chance of keeping control, k e e p i t i n - h
> o u s e. Once you've outsourced it, you lose all and any control.
> the right thing is to keep it in-house and make it right. There
> are VERY few things that deliver a service (no matter how much you
> criticise it, it's still a service that delivers to EVERY residence
> in the city every single week. how many other services can boast
> that!). If the service isn't right, then make it so. You (the
> council) own it.
But that there's the problem with the whole system. It is a
monopoly. With a byzantine process for bringing about change (even
the minutest change), and even if you do achieve that, 49% of everyone
may still disagree with you and want something different. But because
as you say we pay for it whether we want it or not, that monopoly also
has the inbuilt advantage of effectively being able to prevent any
alternative ideas that people may pay for. And the response by the
regime is to vilify that 49%, or worse, like Frances Kennet, make out
they are bonkers.
Who says "every residence, every week" in the best way to do it? For
example I'm sure, given relatively cheap infrastructure, that many
homes already have, one could imagine a system that orders a
collection on demand when a bin is full, wirelessly, and for different
types of waste.
Once (and I assume it is when rather than if - since even if our
council "has no plans" it is likely to be done at a higher level and
imposed) they are charging per use, by volume or weight or whatever, I
don't see how such a monopoly is sustainable. Presumably anyone
offering a similar service, perhaps with different innovations,
different service levels and so on would have to be free to operate.
At that point organizations will be able to usurp that monopolistic
provider anyway. Personally I think it would be better to hasten that
day, let the DSO become a worker controlled and owned organization
(look at ECT!) and let it innovate free of political interference.
Coercion could then be limited, say, to ensuring, perhaps through
environmental health, that everyone is making arrangements and not
being anti-social.
> So if the new policy makes people who currently don't recycle,
> recycle more, then it's a good thing. Isn't it?
But is it the right way to do it? As I said, I have a PET bottle
crusher, whose supplier provides bags and pays you for the crushed
bottles you return to them. Doesn't that sound like a better way to
*encourage* not *make* people who currently don't recycle, recycle
more. Incentive, or punishment? Similarly what's happening about the
"reduce" and "reuse" bit? I'll bet if the system was opened up to
competition and the supermarket companies did begin offering a service
that when they deliver your future rubbish to your door they take last
week's away, they would soon find there was more incentive not to
deliver as much future rubbish in the first place and get more active
in reducing packaging.
> If you don't like it, dispose of your waste yourself. If you want
> to use the council services, then use them. It's not much of a big
> deal. Not for any of us.
It becomes a big deal if the fine amounts to a third of one's annual
city council tax each time
> But, please, don't think of them as your servants. You aren't that
> important.
The system exists (not the individuals) solely to serve purposes that
are, theoretically, "democratically" decided (though with the caveat
that that tends to mean a minority of a minority actually agree
nowadays). The system only exists with the consent of the governed.
If it loses that consent it will either disappear or, as seems more
likely given the overall direction of travel at the moment, become our
authoritarian masters.
> Going on holiday now.
Enjoy - just remember not to leave the bin out though!
> Kate
> ex-city works policy officer.
> Now, not working for the council.
Congratulations (assuming it was by your own choice rather than
involuntary!)
On the question of rubbish left at the end of tenancies (students or other
tenants) I do think that landlords have some responsiblity when the tenancies
change over.
I was at the playground on Valentia Road yesterday while some tenants were
moving into one of the houses that face the park. We would see the excitement
of the two different families as they moved their children in - and could see
them having to make their way past the hedge that had grown to at least 20
feet. You can blame the previous tenants for having let it grow - but why
hadn't the landlord had it trimmed back to an acceptable height? Similarly, if
landlords pulled all the front yards/gardens of these houses back to a decent
standard, then maybe the tenants would invest a little time keeping them neat.
With interest rates so low, wouldn't this be a good time for landlords to
invest a bit of their rental income into keeping the appearances of their
properties up?
Oh come on Kate! You're placing too much emotional significance on the word
'servants'. Check your dictionary: "Servant: n. someone who is hired to perform
service .... ; a person who is in the service of the state, the public, a
company or other body; someone who serves in any capacity" That's what Jock
means, or at least that's what I took him to mean. So no need for a chip on
your shoulder about the terminology. By that definition, the people WE pay to
perform civic services for US are our servants. They should not be dictators,
who create apparently arbitrary rules because they can (e.g. the rule that
wheelie bins have to be 'kerbside' - why? The old bins never were and no one
complained, and I reiterate, now that the bins have wheels, it's easier to get
them a short distance to the lorry than ever before). Having bins in your
front garden is unsightly and, I repeat, disgusting. There are plenty of
houses in Oxford that have little or no front garden. If you have no access
by the dustbin collectors to the back of your house, that's one thing. But if
there is access and no problem getting the bins to the lorries as in
time-honoured practice, why make you have the bins in front?
And re Stephanie's comment on the leaving of bags by the side/on top of - why
not collect them? We're paying for the service! Presumably it's to
discourage overproduction of detritus, but it still leaves the problem of rats
and stray dogs ripping the rejected bags apart, causing further environmental
problems. Oh, and I STILL have no bin, so what am I to do? Sneak under cover
of darkness and place my two carrier bagsworth of landfill into someone else's?
Regarding the comment "If you read your leaflet, you'll see that it talks about
"persistent" offenders. This means if you go on holiday, or have a birthday,
or some other one-0ff event that means you have an over-stuffed bin, you
probably won't be fined." Oh really? I doubt that. Rules is rules innit?
Or are you expecting the refuse collectors to keep a chart of some sort marking
each householder's customary bin behaviour?
Regarding your 7-year-old, everyone knows that children are idealistic and
enthusiastic. By the time they become students hormones have kicked in, and
in any case it's very different running your own household for the first time,
and being a child in a well-organised one. It may well be that the zeitgeist
by the time the next generation has reached young adulthood encompasses
recycling as a normal activity, but I bet that students will still have their
period of indolence.
Stephanie wrote:
> I am worried about the categorical statement: "From 3 August 2009, Oxford
> City Council will no longer collect excess rubbish placed by the side or
> on top of your green wheelie bin" (see scan of front of leaflet, uploaded
> herewith).
I'm not sure how far this idea has spread in the capital and elsewhere, but
in Plaistow, E.London a bunch of previously unemployed lads hit on the idea
of following the regular binmen around... and for £2 per household they -
Pick up the excess rubbish then power-wash (they tow a water thingy behind
their transit) and disinfect the wheelie bins.
Then they post a 'You Have Been Binned' flyer through the letterboxes of
those who said yes, and collect the £2 charge later....a bit like
window-cleaners.
Sorry, it isn't quite pavement-less, there is a pavement about a metre wide and
my front door gives directly onto this.
My wheelie-bin has been on this pavement for the last two years, as has my
neighbour's, and the Council have never picked either of us up on it. AS Kate
says, there is no question of the Council picking on people who are doing their
bit, just on people who are being persistently inconsiderate.
MY wheelie-bin is far more hygeinic than the stinking bin bags I used to have
to carry through the house, and I was jolly glad to get it.
Regards
Noam Bleicher
078 1847 1655
056 0268 4870
The somewhat naive faith that some still contrive to cherish in our Local
Authorities charms us a little, but should give cause for alarm. Verified,
sourced media releases and case histories *ABOUND* of councils abusing the
taxpayer and voter. (Might I suggest for Noam the novelty of Google?)
I have ample direct personal experiences of truly horrific abuses of local
power. It's a disgrace. Some officers get away with apparent abuses which
elected members can or will seemingly do little to stop or challenge
adequately, in many voters' and taxpayers' views.
Councils have waxed insalubriously fat; are overstaffed and overpaid; treat
"customers" who are captive and unable to use our swingeing taxes to buy our
services from cheaper, competent, better providers - with nose-pinching
contempt, hauteur and condescension; and, worst, are too often still
insufficiently accountable to the very people who feed them and get patronized
for the favour!
As for bins, as with our insultingly downtrodden UK OAPs, abroad is often
better; at least within the EU. In Spain, for instance, bins are sometimes
emptied daily - and put BACK! Passports take around 2 days to get from the
local cop shop - and cost £8! OAPs are treated with dignity by "yoof" and
"society" and the state alike - and get a living pension!
Our pensioners are now - officially - poorer than those of Poland and Roumania.
Labour denies this. Will "Labsters" massage "customer satisfaction" stats for
the bins we used to pay half as much to have collected from wherever we
actually kept them, and had properly emptied - weekly!?
PUFGL - Pay Up Front, Get Less. Things can only get better. Less is more. NOT
political, but factual.
Excellent notes by Jock Coats and Pippa Gwilliam yesterday - to which I can add
little - except to add I do not appreciate my local council having the ability
to impose random fines without evidence.
Offenders are defined as those who have located in front of their house extra
waste next to, or on top of the wheelie bin etc - when an official comes to
inspect. Now unless the householder keeps a constant watch on said bin or area
nearby (difficult during the night or when they are at work) then there's
nothing stopping anyone else putting their rubbish there. In other words a fine
can be imposed on an innocent householder - and it would be up to him to prove
he wasn't guilty - a reversal of the laws of this country.
Thinking about it is there an appeal process - or have we got the judge, jury
and executioner in one kangaroo court?
"We're paying for the service" - that's true, but only in a collective sense. Our (small) wheelie bin is generally only a quarter to a third full come collection day, which means I'm in effect subsidising the service to those who fill theirs to the brim and more. I'm happy to do that to some extent, but I'm also keen that the council should take some steps to limit the excess. (I do seem to have missed out on the leaflet, though.) To pay for your service individually, some sort of pay-as-you-throw scheme would be needed. I don't think this would be worth the effort. Bins would have to be secured, the collectors would have to change their practices (I often see them very sensibly combining the contents of two or more bins into one to reduce the number of journeys between kerbside and lorry), and a billing mechanism would have to be in place. It all sounds annoying and expensive to me. DH, it sounds like things are pretty bad in your neighbourhood (where is that, by the way?). Where I live, I now get four collections every two weeks (landfill, garden, plastics/cardboard, glass/paper). I used to get just one weekly. I reckon that's a doubling of the service. The relevance of corrupt local officials and Polish pensioners to rubbish collection in Headington has passed me by though. Personally, I haven't found fortnightly collections to be a problem, even when our bin used to have disposable nappies in it. For occasional special circumstances (such as student end-of-term), I would hope the council would be lenient. If not, the suggestion of following the bin lorry around and charging to collect the excess is an enterprising idea (as long as you have somewhere suitable to take it). Alternatively, according to http://www.oxford.gov.uk/environment/bulky-waste.cfm, you could just phone the council and ask them to collect the extra for free. Andy N Quarry
THere are doubtless hundreds of case of abuse as Steven points out, but they
must be swamped by the millions of us who have very little dealing with
councils at all, or who have positive experiences.
Steven should realise that the while media have a duty to raise cases of abuse,
they have no obligation to provide context, ie the background of trouble-free
business as usual which most of us experience; this does not sell newspapers!
In any job there will always be a minority of 'little Hitlers' but for every
one of these there will be a Kate Stratford - the polar opposite of a little
Hitler - and doubtless hundreds for whom it's just a job. Council employees are
human beings, and I'm sure most leave their desk at 1730 and forget about work,
and are not in the business of pursuing personal vendettas against ratepayers.
Five years ago I had to spend an hour every Sunday afternoon taking recycling
to the dump on the bus. I also had to drag stinking bin bags through the house
the night before bin day. In stark contrast, I now get all my recycling
collected from my door and a hygeinic wheelie-bin out the front of my house,
with a heavy lid that keeps the bin bags out of sight and out of mind.
I can categorically state that I AM BETTER OFF under the new waste regime and
I'm sure I'm not the only one. THis may not suit conspiracy theorists but like
I say I doubt there is a conspiracy!
Regards
Noam Bleicher
078 1847 1655
056 0268 4870
The city council collection service is for large items only (fridges,
armchairs etc.), and it can be up to two weeks before items are
collected. I doubt very much whether they would come specially to
remove waste bags -- and it would be very counter-productive if they
did.
The leaflet offers just two stark solutions for people whose waste
hasn't been collected: they should either (1) put the surplus bags
straight into their newly-emptied wheelie bin (which will ensure a
double-sized problem a fortnight later, etc etc) or (2) take them to
Redbridge (which they won't be able to do if they don't have a car,
and will probably be loath to do even if they do have transport).
The doorstep recycling service is great for those who live a long way
from a recycling centre. But you still have to go to a recycling
centre to get rid of things like plastic containers and Tetrapaks, and
that is a great shame.
The leaflet with this information was tucked inside ("Your Oxford"):
maybe the people who haven't seen it put the city newspaper straight
into their recycling bins?
A bouquet for a change. At the top end of Kennett Road, for what seems like
years, the tenants of the flats had been dumping rubbish bags - lilac, clear
and all sorts, at the foot of the staircase spilling out onto the pavement
pretty much daily. I and others consistently reported this as a nuisance via
the council website. It was acting as a magnet for other dumping including beds
and other furniture.
In the last month, the situation is transformed and there are no more bags and
waste left in this location. The Council has provided a large skip in a
sensible place behind the flats and the tenants are now using that.
I don't know what happened to make the tenants change their habits - it may
have been a steep fine or a series of them, it may have been humane
negotiation. But that's the sort of nuisance that needs to be handled properly
and efficiently, and although it has taken a very long time to resolve, it
clearly has been.
We had another issue with commercial waste in orange bags being left by the bus
stop outside the charity shops - the bags were being ripped open by people
looking for clothes and bargains and the contents strewn about. This too was
stopped (after a long time) through negotiation - I don't know if there were
fines.
But this is the Council (eventually) getting it right. The message for us in
this strand of discussion is that it took months if not years to be resolved -
there was no evidence of them taking rapid action in these flagrant and
offensive cases - so I'm hoping that the practice of enforcement at individual
bin level will be handled intelligently and sensitively rather than in an
immediate, threatening and arbitrary way. Certainly the arbitrary and foolish
cases get written up (very many times in some cases) in dramatic accounts which
end up being found on Google - but will this one be too to balance the
argument?
We can but hope - but it is at least the other side of the coin. Is anyone from
the Council lurking on this discussion who can comment? I think they should -
Government Offices are being encouraged at national level to 'Twitter' and
engage electronically and this is a simple and excellent way for them to do it.
David Clover
Kennett Road
On 29 Jul 2009, at 10:04, David Clover wrote:
> We can but hope - but it is at least the other side of the coin. Is
> anyone from the Council lurking on this discussion who can comment?
> I think they should - Government Offices are being encouraged at
> national level to 'Twitter' and engage electronically and this is a
> simple and excellent way for them to do it.
To wilt your bouquet a little David, I notice that, despite previous
requests and an ongoing national campaign asking councils to make
their news and so on from their websites available on RSS so that
community groups and similar can syndicate it, Oxford still doesn't
have such a simple facility. So if there is anyone listening who can
comment or get something done - can they nag the right people too
about that.
If the software they use for the website does offer it, it ought to be
a simple matter of turning it on, if it doesn't then it's not really
fit web software nowadays!
Hi Jock, although it won't be relevant to the rubbish bag discussion (which is a city council concern), Oxfordshire County Council does have RSS feeds for all its news categories (we categorise our news by subject and place). We also have a feature that makes it easy for local webmasters etc to embed our news on their site - see the bottom of this page: http://www.oxfordshire.gov.uk/rss So, no knowledge of how to manipulate RSS feeds required!
I have had a good look - and it seems that there's no RSS news feed available
from Oxford City Council's website at all on any topic.
I use an excellent RSS aggregator called 'Feed Demon' which I thoroughly
recommend. It works on my desk PC and also in my PDA - and it would work on
mobile phones too. I've added the 'Oxford' feed to mine from OCC.
You can find out about this free service by looking for 'Newsgator' in a Google
search where it all links up.
You need to set up an account, but once that's done everything talks and
updates very nicely whatever system you are coming from - Mac, PC etc.
David Clover
Kennett Road
I live in a terraced house and am supplied with purple sacks for landfill
rubbish. I wish I had blue sacks from the City Council. I was never offered
them. It would be much easier to carry recyclable things through the house in
bags rather than boxes.
Marie Vickers
Like Noam, I've not had too much of a problem - admittedly there's been the
boxes not being emptied, and instances of them being scattered merrily around
my garden, but that seems to have stopped now. And to be fair to the binmen, I
live on a terrace that's set back from the road about 10-15 metres, and we all
just put our bins at our gates and they pick them up and return them there,
which is helpful.
It still annoys me though that I have to take Tetra Paks and general plastics
to Redbridge though - I really don't see why they can't go in the green box
with the rest of the manually-sorted stuff.
"The leaflet offers just two stark solutions for people whose waste
hasn't been collected: they should either (1) put the surplus bags
straight into their newly-emptied wheelie bin (which will ensure a
double-sized problem a fortnight later, etc etc) or (2) take them to
Redbridge (which they won't be able to do if they don't have a car,
and will probably be loath to do even if they do have transport)."
I can't exactly see OBC or Stagecoach being too happy with people turning up
for the bus with dribbly binbags...
Need help? Please contact technical support and we will follow-up in 24-48 hours.
Hosted by E-Democracy.Org. Powered by OnlineGroups.Net using the open source web-based mailing list manager GroupServer.